REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS
Different problems. Same Dedication.
Explore selected matters below, or skip ahead to Selected Results for addtional examples of outcomes obtained in litigation, appeals, and intellectual property disputes.
AI.Law v. Butler Labs d/b/a Eve Legal
PATENT LITIGATION · ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Insight represents AI.Law in a patent infringement action against Butler Labs, the company behind Eve Legal, an AI platform for plaintiffs' law firms.
The case involves technology for using artificial intelligence to transform unstructured information into structured, long-form documents. Litigating the dispute requires getting beneath the increasingly familiar label of “generative AI” and into how the technology actually works, including large language models, the processing and structuring of data, and the systems used to generate lengthy legal documents despite the technical constraints of the underlying models.
AI.Law alleges that Eve Legal's platform infringes U.S. Patent No. 12,461,932, which covers a method and system for transforming data using artificial intelligence to generate content.
The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and remains at the pleading stage.
Status: Ongoing
Navidea Biopharmaceuticals Shareholder Litigation
SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION · DIRECTOR & OFFICER LIABILITY
Insight represents four current and former directors of Navidea Biopharmaceuticals in ongoing shareholder litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery involving allegations arising from a series of corporate transactions, changes in board composition and control of the company.
The litigation presents more than the underlying claims against the directors. When Navidea's D&O insurer initially declined to fund their defense, the directors faced the prospect of personally bearing the substantial cost of defending complex litigation. Insight addressed the coverage issue as part of the broader problem facing its clients and ultimately obtained D&O insurance coverage for their defense costs.
The underlying shareholder litigation remains pending.
Status: Ongoing
Tobey v. West Coast Wellness Group
PERSONAL INJURY · MEDICAL DEVICE TECHNOLOGY
Insight represented an individual injured during treatment at a wellness clinic. What initially appeared to be a relatively straightforward personal injury matter became considerably more complex as the investigation turned to the shockwave therapy device used during the treatment.
Understanding what happened required understanding the device itself: how it was designed to operate, how it was being used, and whether a malfunction contributed to the injury. As the technical evidence developed, the manufacturer was added to the litigation and the case expanded beyond the conduct of the wellness provider to include claims involving the medical device.
Insight worked through the technical and medical evidence, including the operation of a technology it had not previously encountered, to develop the case against the responsible parties.
Result: Confidential settlement before expert discovery
Rail Assets, LLC v. Wabtec Corp.
PATENT LITIGATION · RAILROAD SAFETY TECHNOLOGY
Insight represented Rail Assets in patent litigation involving technology designed to record and preserve critical information surrounding potential railroad accidents.
The matter required becoming deeply familiar with an industry and technology well outside the ordinary legal landscape. The patented system captures video together with information about a locomotive's operation, including speed, location, and other data that can help reconstruct what occurred before an accident. Understanding how those systems worked, how they developed, and how competing railroad technologies operated was central to litigating the patent claims.
Insight pursued infringement claims against Wabtec through extensive patent litigation, including a technology tutorial and claim-construction proceedings.
Result: Confidential settlement before trial
Paint Zoom, LLC v. Groupon, Inc.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY · COUNTERFEIT & COMPETITING PRODUCTS
Insight represented Paint Zoom in a dispute involving the sale of allegedly counterfeit and competing versions of its consumer paint-sprayer system.
What appeared to be a single commercial problem implicated multiple areas of intellectual property law. Insight brought claims involving design patent infringement, copyright, trade dress, trademark, false designation of origin and unfair competition, using different forms of intellectual property protection together to address the client's underlying problem.
Result: Significant confidential settlement before defendants answered
JS Elekta Shareholder Litigation
SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION · INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS DISPUTES
A shareholder dispute against JS Elekta Limited, a Cyprus-based company with interests in an international telecommunications business, and members of its board resulted in the dismissal of two directors we represented.
Following their dismissal, the representation expanded to include advising JS Elekta's board in connection with the underlying dispute and subsequent international litigation.
What began as the defense of two individual directors developed into a broader relationship requiring an understanding of the company's ownership structure, business relationships and disputes spanning multiple jurisdictions.
Result: Dismissal of two directors; representation subsequently expanded to the company's board
SELECTED RESULTS
A broader record of litigation experience.
The matters above illustrate how we approach complicated problems. The results below provide a broader view of outcomes obtained across appeals, intellectual property, commercial litigation and other complex disputes.
Representative results depend on the facts and circumstances of each matter and do not guarantee a similar outcome in future matters
1 / APPEALS
-
AlexSam v. Aetna — Successful Federal Circuit appeal; remanded.
-
AlexSam v. Mastercard — Successful Federal Circuit appeal; remanded.
2 / DISMISSALS & DISPOSITIVE RESULTS
-
Planet One — Dismissal obtained for defendants.
-
ERMI / International Rehabilitative Sciences — Dismissal following early summary judgment motion.
-
ERMI / Sportstek — Dismissal obtained for defendant.
3 / PATENT & IP RESULTS
-
AlexSam v. HealthEquity — §101 motion to dismiss denied.
-
Hydro Net v. Inseego — §101 motion to dismiss denied.
-
AlexSam v. Cigna — §101 motion denied; also prevailed on key claim construction.
-
AlexSam v. WageWorks — §101 motion denied.
-
AlexSam v. Simon Property Group — Prevailed on key claim construction.
4 / SETTLEMENTS & ARBITRATIONS
-
AIG D&O matter — Favorable pre-answer settlement.
-
Paint Zoom — Favorable pre-answer settlement of multiple IP claims.
-
Rail Assets — Favorable settlement following heavily contested patent litigation.
-
Confidential manufacturing matter — Favorable arbitration award